3 ms·

Perhaps I need a history lesson, but I don't think the kernel developers 25 years ago had any idea that some kid would be learning C through the code they wrote

Perhaps I need a history lesson, but I don't think the kernel developers 25 years ago had any idea that some kid would be learning C through the code they wrote. I also doubt the engineers at Texas Instruments thought that enabling programs on my TI-84 would spawn my or many others' passion for programming. It was simply coincidence paired with curiosity. I think curious children of the right mindset will find the opportunity to learn whether we intentionally pursue it or not. In fact, by planning out learning environments for those kids we might be doing them a disservice by structuring their learning towards what WE think is important at a particular moment in time. But sure, flying car software should be open source.

sharpercoder 9y ago
This feels a lot like the good old framework/library debate. Instead of providing everything for the learner in a framework-y way (user must adapt, we call you), it seems better to offer lego blocks instead. Well documented, componentized, reusable things which can act as parts of any new system.
Jtsummers 9y ago
Actually, I think programming on the TI-84 was deliberately intended to get people interested. Math textbooks from the 1980s and 1990s included BASIC snippets at the end of chapters/sections (in the US). The dialects varied, but porting was a trivial task. In the 1980s there was a push for programming as part of the standard curriculum. Whether it was TI's corporate intent, or motivated by satisfying educators' goals, they made programming available on their calculators quite deliberately.
- Hydraulix989 9y ago
  As a completely irrelevant aside, I quickly moved onto Z80 assembly when I was a kid because TI-BASIC was so slow and limited. It was amazing getting sprites drawn at real-time rates.
  - Jtsummers 9y ago
    Same, though I was too dumb[0] to grok what I was doing in high school. It took me until my third CS course in college to finally understand what I was doing at that level of programming. [0] Not really dumb. I was accomplishing my goals, but I had no understanding. It was a combination of rote copying and imitation, and dumb luck.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
godelski 9y ago
> I don't think the kernel developers 25 years ago had any idea that some kid would be learning C through the code they wrote. I am sure you are correct in this statement, but I do not believe in hones in on what the point of the article is. The point is that now that we know people learn in this manner we should do what we can to provide as many learning avenues for future generations. Certainly people will always find avenues, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't provide as many opportunities that we can.

sharpercoder 9y ago

This feels a lot like the good old framework/library debate. Instead of providing everything for the learner in a framework-y way (user must adapt, we call you), it seems better to offer lego blocks instead. Well documented, componentized, reusable things which can act as parts of any new system.

Jtsummers 9y ago

Actually, I think programming on the TI-84 was deliberately intended to get people interested. Math textbooks from the 1980s and 1990s included BASIC snippets at the end of chapters/sections (in the US). The dialects varied, but porting was a trivial task. In the 1980s there was a push for programming as part of the standard curriculum. Whether it was TI's corporate intent, or motivated by satisfying educators' goals, they made programming available on their calculators quite deliberately.

Hydraulix989 9y ago
As a completely irrelevant aside, I quickly moved onto Z80 assembly when I was a kid because TI-BASIC was so slow and limited. It was amazing getting sprites drawn at real-time rates.
- Jtsummers 9y ago
  Same, though I was too dumb[0] to grok what I was doing in high school. It took me until my third CS course in college to finally understand what I was doing at that level of programming. [0] Not really dumb. I was accomplishing my goals, but I had no understanding. It was a combination of rote copying and imitation, and dumb luck.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

godelski 9y ago

> I don't think the kernel developers 25 years ago had any idea that some kid would be learning C through the code they wrote. I am sure you are correct in this statement, but I do not believe in hones in on what the point of the article is. The point is that now that we know people learn in this manner we should do what we can to provide as many learning avenues for future generations. Certainly people will always find avenues, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't provide as many opportunities that we can.